Everything is always in process. Flapping like a butterfly, the Network is watching and working on the Compassion Project. The First sharing economy was knowledge. A non-profit blog enabling the exploration and efficient sharing of information, thoughts, and opinion, regarding autism, cosmology, philosophy, politics, psychology, science, sociology, theology, and truth. "It is time to tell all."

Featured Post

Different from empathy and sympathy compassion is the strength to be willing to try and ease someone's suffering, to help them ho...

Tuesday, October 4, 2016

The #Memoir of #God: The #evolution of #compassion revealed through #story

You can't see the entire mountain of truth from one point of view, particularly if it's the one that your feet are planted upon.

Fiction can illuminate fact to reveal truth, with a good
story. A good story has compassion for the characters, plot, and audience, regardless of likeability. Suspending disbelief helps to open the mind.

The culture, economic, hierarchy, and politics, that control a religion
are the problem, not the core message of its foundation, its story. They can twist the
growth and development of any movement, organization, system, ideology, or
society.

The following is from BBC Radio 4:

The Reith Lectures

Journalist, Sonia Sodha reflects on the first of Kwame Anthony Appiah's Reith Lectures.

Ask
anyone what it means to be religious and you’re likely to get some sort
of variation on “believing in God”. In fact, lots of the words we use
to describe religion – such as “faith” and “creed” – relate to the idea
of belief.

But in this year’s first Reith Lecture,
the philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah argues that in thinking about
religion, we have focused too much on what religious people believe and
not enough on what religious people do.

According
to Appiah, there are three dimensions to religion. Yes, one of those
dimensions is a body of belief. But Appiah argues we over-emphasise the
importance of belief at the expense of two other dimensions: the rituals
and social norms that people carry out as part of religious practice,
and the communities within which religious practice takes place.

To
illustrate this, he uses the example of Judaism. Appiah argues that
even if someone studied the Torah in great detail, and embraced all the
beliefs and principles it contains, that person would not become Jewish.
Taking on the beliefs of Judaism without adopting its practices or
becoming part of a community of worship isn’t enough.
Indeed,
Appiah says it would be impossible to adopt all the beliefs and
practices set out in holy books such as the Bible, the Torah or the
Qur’an in abstract. All of these religious scriptures give ambiguous,
and sometimes contradictory guidance.
Take the kosher dietary code
set out in the Torah: it sets out a list of birds that Jews are
forbidden from eating. But this list does not map out perfectly on to
modern bird species, and religious authorities disagree on what exactly
is on and off the list.

Here
Appiah is pointing out that religious scriptures are not only open to
interpretation, they have to be interpreted to make any sense at all.
And the way that scriptures are interpreted – and religion is practised –
depends very much on the cultural norms in the societies in which they
are operating.

Appiah
gives the example of his mother dressing for church. St Paul said in
the Bible that women must cover their heads while in church. Given that
this was the custom for respectable dress at the time this pronouncement
was made, Appiah’s mother interpreted this as a call for women to dress
respectably by local standards when they attend church, rather than a
literal instruction that women should not go to church with their heads
uncovered.

A line of Buddhas at the U Min Thonze cave in Sagaing near Mandalay, Burma

In
other words, Appiah is arguing that it’s not a case of religions
shaping cultures and societies, so much as cultures and societies
shaping contemporary interpretations of religion. In the past, societies
have interpreted the Bible as making proclamations against
homosexuality or gender inequality, but these interpretations reflect
the cultural norms of the time. It is possible to read the Bible and
conclude something very different.
Appiah
contrasts his view of religion with that of fundamentalists. Religious
fundamentalists argue no interpretation is needed to apply religious
scriptures to day-to-day life: books such as the Bible and the Qur’an
contain one version of the truth that all those practising Christianity
and Islam must live by.

Is Appiah right?

One critique of Appiah’s lecture is that he is arguing something
quite uncontroversial, something that only religious fundamentalists and
the strongest opponents of religion would really disagree with. Most
Christians, Muslims and Jews do not seek to try to apply a literal
interpretation of the Bible, Qur’an and Torah to the way they live their
lives. Many religious scholars have long stressed the importance of
interpreting religious scriptures to ensure they make sense in the
contemporary world.

Another
critique might be that there are a number of important contemporary
questions about the role of religion that Appiah’s analysis does not
help us with very much. While he stresses the importance of
interpretation to religion, he doesn’t say much about who is doing the
interpreting – in other words, where the power lies in religious
communities. Until relatively recently, men occupied the key positions
of power in most world religions.

Appiah
might argue that this simply reflects the structure of power in society
at large. But religion has been used to move societies rapidly
backwards in terms of gender inequality, for example in modern-day
Afghanistan. Implicit in Appiah’s argument seems to be the idea of
religion as neither a force for good nor bad; it simply reflects the
societies we live in. But there are cases where religion doesn’t just
reflect human behaviours and cultures, but seems to drive them – for
better or worse.

Second, Appiah’s approach helps us characterise
fundamentalism as the idea that religion is all about doctrine and
literal application of religious scriptures, to the exclusion of
everything else. But he offers little insight in how to challenge
religious fundamentalism – one of the biggest questions facing world
leaders with the rise of so-called Islamic State.

Third, Appiah
does not address how religious identity relates to other forms of
identity, and how we resolve differences when they clash. Take the
burkini ban in France: should the French state be able to insist Muslim
women wear less on the beach because the burkini is not thought to
reflect French cultural values? Where do we draw the line when
identities clash?

Having rejected Catholicism and Christianity at 13, I was in
university in my early twenties, working on my book series and theories, when the message and story behind Christianity was clarified by the lens
of The Gospel According To Peanuts by Robert L. Short, read to me by a good
friend. My passions for quantum theory, cosmology, string theory, science-fiction, fantasy literature, and movie-making, along with an agnostic curiosity about religions and philosophies, allowed me to suspend disbelief enough for Snoopy. My favourite childhood Red Barron foe pointed to the possibility of a greater story told in part by all tales, including childhood, cultural, instructive, mythical, religious, philosophical, factual, fictional, personal, and scientific.

I am most familiar with major works of fantasy, science-fiction, philosophy, science, intellectual literature, and the story of the Christian Bible. I will focus on that tale, a fair choice I think because three major religions and their numerous sects sprang from its interpretation and additions.

I always had problems with the Roman Catholic interpretation and the orthodoxy it established for general Christianity. There were too many glaring plot holes, too many mysteries said the be impenetrable. Not meant to be known, so don't ask., just accept that God is weird. He's perfectly, good, informed, orderly, and unchanging, and completely unpredictable, occasionally cruel, but always loving. He can do anything, but is too lazy to stop horrible things and people. He's a he that isn't a he who is three but one, everywhere but nowhere, and part of us all but absent. He plays games of life and death for the apparent purpose of making us worthy to sit around singing his praises forever. All without a clear purpose. Hardly satisfying to my curiosity and imagination. It didn't make any sense. Blind faith is too easily misled.

A being that powerful, perfect,informed, and orderly, shouldn't appear so random and capricious. Science and its mathematical language continues to reveal that most apparent randomness is just due to the number of hidden and known factors yet to be discovered. There is a common rule, or set of rules, that links the unpredictable behaviour, buried under the details of the story or blended into an apparent different one. A detective needs to dig into obvious holes in the initial story to see where they lead, to examine and compare every other story in the area for things missed, dismissed, that contradict or agree, or that unlock more of the story. The detective must keep an open mind and be willing to accept all stories but believe none, suspending disbelief enough to take a look from the storyteller's point of view. Perspective can change everything.

My disbelief was suspended enough to see how the pieces fit when I saw them in what I may have otherwise dismissed as a different story. Pieces that I was trying to discover through reading, viewing, and questioning, and assemble through fictional and philosophical writing into a the tale of the evolution of consciousness, spirit, the divine, and existence itself. Drawing from
Taoism, Buddhism, metaphysics, Biblical theology,
science, and the book Process and Reality by A.N. Whitehead, I formed my
description of spiritual evolution. Thus, I was in a place where only the story and the messages mattered.

This allowed me to see the great similarity between the theology of "Mormons" of the Church of Jesus Christs of Latter Day Saints and my own
developing ideas when I encountered it shortly afterwards. Their belief in education and asking questions in order to develop faith through testimony was greatly appealing and refreshing compared to my upbringing. They actually had a purpose for their rituals and even voted on whether to support leaders and such. No infallibility, just inspiration and direct prayers with simple but clear answers in response. No confessions to or absolution by anyone but the deity. It allowed me to view the Book of Mormon as another part of the Christian Bible. Things fell into place, holes filled, and the story started making sense.

As a writer, my eyes opened the possible intended story of
the Christian, and its central protagonist, Jesus. Fact, fiction, or
inspired blend, the Christian Bible is basically a series of case studies
provided as practical examples from which to draw guidance and meaning. They
attempt to show how decisions, laws, social experiments, ideas, and actions
arise and turn out. The case studies are connected by their creator, guide,
observer and student, like most experimental tests. The Christian Bible is the
memoir of the individual who we call God as he tries to care for his siblings,
all inheritors of the Earth. It describes what we’ve done to try to please or
copy the character or power of our remote but loving father. The plot of the
story is set up by its purpose and the challenges and dangers of mortality. A
story, or a test, needs a beginning and an end.

I see the Christian Bible as the coming-of-age story of the
elected manager of the Earth, Jesus, known as Yahweh in his youth. Like
father and siblings, he was a child of the Elohim, the adults of the universe.
Too busy working to supervise the children once old enough to learn on their
own they let the children decode who to look after them and the star pupil was
elected to lead the class. His coming-of-age enables ours.

He shows the way but does not force you to follow. He lets
nature and your choices take their course and have their consequences. That’s
the knowledge of good (compassion) and evil (dehumanization) that can make a simple
animal divine or a child responsible for their actions. A knowledge required by
law in order to commit a crime.

Time and space were long considered to be fixed absolutes, separate and
limitless, but recently learned to be relative, combined, and finite. I
believe this to be true of omnipotence and omniscience. Both are
relative to perspective. A god is all-seeing and all-known compared to
us, just as we are to the people of the Ice Age or Biblical
times. Existence is reaching toward perfect but will never grasp it.
Mormon theology describes a "god" are not as a static being but as an
evolving individual entity linked to others by relationship and
responsibility. The Trinity shares a role of responsible called the
Godhead, not a single being.

No one is above the law, particularly the existential axiom
of cause and effect. Something only exists if it is capable of causing an
effect. Cause and effect are inseparable and eternal; the last effect is the
first cause in an endless cyclical process called existence. You can’t
start, stop, or control it, only try to cause a positive effect with minimal
unintended negative consequences as nature runs its course. Cause and effect
are the first natural law defining and defined by existence. Everything is bound
by it and must obey its necessity. Nothing is supernatural even a god.
Everything is united in cause and effect. Good and evil lie in choosing to
cause an intended effect. That’s freewill. Its exercise can make us divine.

Divine responsibility and wisdom in the exercise of freewill
is what defines a god and true wisdom requires humility. You don’t learn if
your arrogance blocks admitting the weakness in your knowledge and recognize
your ignorance in order to seek and accept improvement. Humility requires
compassion for imperfection.

Nothing’s perfect. Perfection is a process not a
goal, like civilization.

Most Mormons are unorthodox Christians, not Antichrists.
Lucifer was the prime example of an Antichrist. He was the first and many have
followed. History records a few.

Mormon theology and spiritual evolutionary theory interpret
the story as saying that we are born larval spirits taking in sustenance before
entering the cocoon of life from which we emerge to spread wings and begin
preparing for the great mass migration and parenthood. Mormon theology
describes us as gods in foetal form, yet to be born and far from adulthood.

If a human is a god and evil is dehumanization at its core,
then evil is a negative act against god, a crime, an assault, a theft, a
belittling of the divine, a sin. One human intentionally dehumanizing another
dehumanizes both, creating an evil or mad god called devil or demon. We
are like the Olympians, demigod children of greater beings pretending to be
them and fighting over our playground while our parents work on the
universe.

Mormon theology interprets the story as saying that Yahweh of
the Old Testament and Jesus of the New are the same individual entity, just
before and after embodiment. Yahweh was a young god, learning how to steward
the world of his responsibility from his father’s example and lessons, with a
license given by his siblings. He had love, but had yet to develop compassion.
Thu she got jealous, offended, frustrated, and tough with the other children,
scolding and punishing them and trying to get them to behave with rewards and
rules, lots of rules. Then his punishment went too far and set everything back.
But, he repeated and tried again to be more compassionate. He continued
to be same individual, but grew as a person, changing for the better.

Embodiment gave him our experience and personal pain,
informing his love with compassion enough to experience total empathy with us
and sacrifice himself for the common good. Compassion completed him and
the crucifixion became his right of passage into adulthood, as well as ours.
Compassion raised him so that he could truly judge us and forgive what we
cannot.

Yahweh had imperfect experience and judgment with which he
made mistakes. He was terrible for giving out too much information and playing
favourites to start. He not only favored Abel over Cain, but he let it be known
in a way sure to provoke. A little more subtly might have been better, but that
may not have been his purpose. He expected them to behave because he said so.
He did the same with Abraham’s kids creating the trouble between the Jews and
Arabs that still goes on. He also marked the Jews as favourites and planned for
great things, pumping them up with pride until they fell and drawing every
bully on the planet to them still. Teacher’s pet always gets
pounded. He is no more perfect than existence, and existence makes it up
moment to moment. If he is fallible, how much more so are we with our
short vision and high minds? Then, he was embodied to full experience the
consequences of choice, chance, and nature’s laws; to experience our pain, in
person.

Jesus was the first of us to repent. A true leader asks
nothing that he wouldn’t do himself.

Mormon theology interprets that story as saying that our
father gave his children the choice of how the test of mortality would be run.
It came to voting between Jesus and Lucifer to lead. Lucifer is our most
handsome, charismatic, arrogant, selfish, and domineering, brother. He offered
to force us all to obey the laws and be good, in order that all might appear to
pass and all credit be given to him. Pulling in less than a majority of
votes, he declared it rigged and fighting ensued. Jesus’s side, our side, won,
but Lucifer continues to work behind the scenes to oppose him and
freewill. Everyone human every embodied voted and fought for things to
be this way, but, some didn’t realize what they were voting for and others only
did it to blend in, not so we all could win. Mortality is the test that reveals
them while providing a chance to change their choices and the possibility of
real growth.

I like the idea that, statistically, it is not likely that
our father was the Jesus of his generation. It gives me hope that any
slob can graduate and be successful. Mormon theology interprets the story
as saying that only men get the priesthood, because only they need it to have a
chance of graduation. More women graduate to positions beyond raising the
children than men, without remedial help and strict practice in the practical
exercise of compassion. Female divinities have more important things to
do than serve in the Trinity. There may be many Mother Natures.

Composed of two (three for Mormons) collections of
testimony, the Christian Bible is only Volume One of a greater work. An
apocalypse is a revelation not an ending. The Book of Revelation is a preview
of the beginning of Volume Two, the rest of the story, our story, the Book of
Life, mostly unwritten except for rough plot and growing list of characters
with many revisions to come. Our roles have yet to be full chosen and
determined.

Fate is an irresistible, inevitable probability created by
an accumulated combination of nature’s laws, chance, and choice. Anyone one of
these can alter it. We can only possess personal control over one.

Destiny can be compassionate.

True divinity is free-willed compassion. It turns the
madness of life into sanity.

Choice is the natural mechanism and compassion the driving
force of the process of spiritual evolution.

This article and included CBC Ideas radio program explains
it in a more scientific way.

According to my understanding of the collective story, the Creator
(aka God, Allah, Yahweh, Jesus, Nature, Physics, Evolution, Art,
Invention, etc.) organizes the universe to generate new associations for
all. The names are different titles for the story of creation, driven
by a singular force. The unknown Dark Energy of expansion. The Void is
infinite and eternal in expanse. This might be expressed in math as: 0/0
= 1 or Infinity/Infinity = 1 or X/X = 1 or Unknown/Unknown = 1.

That's my interpretation. I'm not saying that I have the Answer, just a clue revealed by stories.

Armstrong argues that religion is too often a scapegoat, masking the
real reasons for violence, hatred, and war. She points out that
territorial, political, cultural and - above all - economic motives
are to blame.

Religion may be inherently political, Armstrong says, but every
single one of the world's major religions call for the same soluton to
violence: compassion.

Karen Armstrong speaking at the 3rd Global
Conference on World's Religions After September 11. The event was held
in Montreal in September 2016. (Photo: Eva Blue)

Compassion is the essence of the Golden Rule: love thy neighbour.

"The Golden Rule requires that you look into your own heart, discover
what has given you pain in the past, and then refuse under any
circumstance whatsoever to inflict that pain on anybody else."

This sentiment has been echoed by all the great prophets, including
Confucius, Mohammed, Jesus, the Buddha, and Hillel the Elder.

"These sages, they were living in societies like our own where
violence had reached an unprecedented crescendo. And they all said that
unless we learn to treat others as we would wish to be treated we'll
simply destroy one another. And that has never been more true than it is
today."

Armstrong says 'love thy neighbour' doesn't refer to a sort of "soggy
affection". Instead, it means assisting people in practical terms:
coming to their aid in times of trouble and supporting them even when it
goes against our short term interests.
"Who is my neighbour in this globalized world? Everybody is our neighbour. We are now so deeply interconnected."

Armstrong urges us to follow the lead of the Buddha.

"The Buddha looked at the world… with compassion and saw the world in
pain and spent the next 40 years of his life trying to help people to
live with their pain. This is our message now. This is what every one of
us can do: to increase awareness of the pain of the world, to let
it disturb us. It's not easy... We should all be sweating with the
effort of how to bring the message of compassion - that alone can save
our world - to public awareness."

Translate

About Me

The Pündi are a race from my fantasy novels, the Continuum Chronicles, an exploration of spiritual evolution theory. Appearing like us, they are really child-sized aliens cursed by their own intelligence, trapped as observers unable to share their knowledge. They often develop an individual obsessive interest.

I write and publish, not selling anything, just trying to share ideas that might profit everyone. I aim not for originality but creativity, organizing what exists to generate new associations. I'm a writer with thick glasses and autism, familiar with the struggle for clarity. Novelist, researcher, internet activist, spiritual evolutionist, and process philosopher, I believe in democratic social capitalism with a well-regulated engine of sustainable markets. As a writer, I find that most blockages tend to be improvements trying to occur to me.